Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided; description adds limited behavioral context beyond the schema, such as that projects group resources. However, it does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or uniqueness constraints on project names.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, no wasted words. Efficiently communicates the purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a creation tool with an output schema, the description lacks important context such as whether the tool is idempotent, what happens on duplicate names, or required permissions. The explanation of projects is helpful but not enough.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., name required, description optional).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Create a new project' and explains what projects do, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_project and delete_project.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for creating a project but provides no explicit guidance on when to use or avoid, nor alternatives. Context from siblings helps but is not explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.